In a statement, the party said the suit, filed on Wednesday, seeks a declaration that MACC has no authority or jurisdiction to investigate or arrive at a finding that any judge serving in High Court, Court of Appeal and Federal Court has breached the Judges’ Code of Ethics 2009, and had a conflict of interest when presiding over court cases.
Muda is also seeking a declaration that MACC’s findings on Nazlan’s alleged conflict of interest and breach of the Judges’ Code of Ethics when presiding over former prime minister Najib Razak’s SRC International trial in the High Court, were unlawful and unconstitutional.
On Feb 23, law and institutional reform minister Azalina Othman Said revealed that MACC’s report pertaining to its probe into Nazlan had been submitted to Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat.
In a letter to Najib’s solicitors, Shafee & Co, on April 6, Azalina confirmed MACC’s probe on Nazlan concluded he had violated the Judges’ Code of Ethics and had a conflict of interest when presiding over the SRC International case.
She said this was based on a report dated Feb 20 containing MACC’s findings extended to her, stating that MACC had found “issues of wrongdoing” by Nazlan that the chief justice “needed to consider”.
On Feb 24, a seven-member Federal Court panel led by Tengku Maimun ruled that MACC had not followed protocol when conducting its investigations into Nazlan.
The apex court said investigating bodies like MACC must consult the chief justice before initiating an investigation against judges. Its failure to do so showed there was “a lack of bona fide on their part”.
Muda secretary-general Amir Hadi said Azalina’s letter to Najib’s lawyers revealed a “serious transgression” on MACC’s part.
“MACC’s powers to investigate are confined to offences under the MACC Act 2009.
“It does not have the jurisdiction, authority and purview, much less any expertise, to investigate and make findings on breaches of the Judges’ Code of Ethics 2009 or conflict of interest on the part of superior court judges,” the statement quoted Amir’s affidavit as saying.
Amir also said the manner and timing in which the contents of the letter were revealed publicly “clearly demonstrates a lack of bona fide (and was) an assault (on) judicial independence and the separation of powers”.
He said it was “shocking” that Azalina saw fit to respond to queries from Najib’s lawyers, adding that this raised “serious questions about the confidentiality of processes within MACC”, and whether there is an ulterior motive for a purported “leak” of documents.
“This amounts to serious intimidation and harassment against judges, as well as a malicious attempt to interfere with their duty to arrive at decisions and uphold the rule of law without fear or favour,” he said.
The court fixed May 15 for case management.
Muda is represented in the suit by Lim Wei Jiet.